Attorney Richard Busch, writing a guest column in The Hollywood Reporter for its March 21 issue, said that Thicke and Williams underestimated the Gaye family and their defence.

Busch explained that the trouble started when the Gaye family's representative "reached out to their side to discuss trying to resolve" disagreement over the similarities between the songs. But Thicke and Williams launched a pre-emptive strike with a lawsuit seeking "declaratory relief".

Attorney Richard Busch, left, and Nona Gaye, daughter of the late Marvin Gaye, after a jury awarded the singer's children nearly $US7.4 million. Photo: AP

"I was surprised... I didn't know they'd do this," he wrote.

"My opinion is that they believed the Gayes didn't have resources and the wherewithal to fight. My belief then was they were being bullies. I bet now they regret it."

Advertisement

Busch said his opponent, Howard E. King, gambled on a strategy of playing the issue out in the media. They were "continually saying that all they did was take a feeling. And if they did any copying, it was only a genre".

"We didn't view it like this at all. Yes, it involved a big, popular song, but this was a straight-up copyright claim over compositional elements that we believed had been taken."

Given that King has said he will appeal the decision, Busch's decision to write a column on the case looks a lot like his own play for support in the media. Especially as he painted the Gaye family as underdogs after the trial judge refused to allow all of Got To Give It Up to be played to the jury.

It's obviously not something Busch could do during the first trial or when the appeal is being heard. He did not miss a chance to play up the emotive side of the case either.

"I am my own biggest critic who broods over any mistakes, and if I was nervous, it was only because of how strongly I wanted to do right by Nona and Frankie Gaye, but let me tell you something: When I do a trial, it's like an individual battle each day amid a larger war. And we felt we won each day."

Busch claimed he had to distract himself before the verdict and did so by walking on the beach and watching "a Sons of Anarchy marathon". When the final day of the trial came, on March 10, he said: "We didn't start this case. But we made sure to finish it."

But finishing it might not be so easy. After the eight-member federal court jury in Los Angeles found in favour of the Gaye family, Thicke and Williams' lead attorney, Howard E. King, told Fox Business Network: "We owe it to songwriters around the world to make sure this verdict doesn't stand."

Glen Rothstein, an intellectual property attorney, told Yahoo the judgement would create a precedent making it difficult for musicians and producers to "pay homage" to their musical idols in recordings.

"Today's successful verdict, with the odds more than stacked against the Marvin Gaye estate, could redefine what copyright infringement means for recording artists," said Rothstein.

The Gaye family is now likely to take an injunction against Blurred Lines being played so it can negotiate royalties.They could also claim part of future earnings from the 2013 worldwide No.1.

Busch argued the judge's decision over what the jury could hear in evidence led Thicke and Williams' team to base their case on the idea that the songs were not note-for-note identical.

"I don't think it's a good idea to tell the jury, 'Yes, we may have copied, but don't find us liable because there's not a perfect match'."

Busch wrote that musicologists Judith Finelland and Ingrid Monson showed there was copying, but even more importantly he said that "inconsistency" in Thicke's testimony was "powerful".

"[Thicke] went from saying he told Pharrell to create a song like Got to Give It Up to saying he wanted to have that feeling, to saying he wanted to evoke the era, to not having any conversations at all."